This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
The number of complaints referred by the Canadian Human Rights Commission for inquiry by the Tribunal decreased slightly in 2005 from the record highs we experienced in 2003 and 2004.
I remarked last year on one of the significant challenges the Tribunal was facing because of the number of parties appearing before the Tribunal without legal representation. These complainants are often people of modest means who are not able to afford legal representation. To address this difficulty, the Tribunal implemented a new system of case management in 2005.
At a very early stage in the inquiry process, a teleconference is conducted by a Member of the Tribunal with all the parties and/or their counsel. During the teleconference, the Member explains the Tribunal’s pre-hearing and hearing process and what is required from the parties. The Member also sets time frames agreed to by the parties for document and witness disclosure and for hearing dates. In addition to explaining the Tribunal’s hearing process, case management serves to ensure that complaints are heard and decided within a timely period.
In 2006-07, the Tribunal will continue to make adjustments to its new case management process. We will also be adjusting our automated case management system, called the Tribunal Toolkit, which was installed last year to enhance information retrieval efficiency and data integrity. As well, we will complete a revision to the Tribunal’s publication ‘What Happens Next - Guide to the Tribunal Process’, which is designed to help unrepresented parties better understand the Tribunal process.
Finally, in 2005, the Tribunal saw the appointment of a new Vice-Chair, a new full-time Member and four new part-time Members. The new Members bring much more diversity to the Tribunal.
The Tribunal remains well positioned to continue to offer Canadians a full, fair and timely hearing process.
J. Grant Sinclair
MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATION STATEMENT |
I submit, for tabling in Parliament, the 2006–2007 Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) for the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in the Guide for the Preparation of Part III of the 2006-2007 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental reports:
Name: J. Grant Sinclair Title: Chairperson Date: August 21, 2006 |
Summary Information
Raison d’être—The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body that hears complaints of discrimination referred by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and determines whether the activities complained of violate the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA). The purpose of the Act is to protect individuals from discrimination and to promote equal opportunity. The Tribunal also decides cases brought under the Employment Equity Act (EEA) and, pursuant to section 11 of the CHRA, determines allegations of wage disparity between men and women doing work of equal value in the same establishment. |
Individuals have equal access, as determined by the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Employment Equity Act, to the opportunities that exist in Canadian society through the fair and equitable adjudication of human rights and employment equity cases that are brought before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. |
The Tribunal’s priorities are largely dictated by its singular adjudicative mission:
We will therefore continue to do what we do well: provide Canadians with a fair and efficient inquiry process through the adjudication of human rights disputes. Tribunal members will provide well-reasoned decisions and, where appropriate, order suitable remedies for those who have suffered discrimination. The Tribunal’s decisions will also provide guidance and direction to employers and service providers on the development of policies and practices that are consistent with respect to human rights.
Financial Resources (Millions)
2006–2007 |
2007–2008 |
2008–2009 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.4 |
Human Resources (Full-Time Equivalents)
2006–2007 |
2007–2008 |
2008–2009 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
In addition to its usual business, the Tribunal plans to pursue the goals summarized in the followingchart:
Tribunal Priorities – Program Activity: Public Hearings under the Canadian Human Rights Act
Type |
Planned Spending |
|||||
Expected Result |
2006-2007 |
2007-2008 |
2008-2009 |
|||
Strategic Outcome: The Tribunal’s single strategic outcome is: Canadians have equal access to the opportunities that exist in our society through the fair and equitable adjudication of human rights cases that are brought before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. |
||||||
Priority # 1 Monitor Tribunal inquiry performance targets. |
Ongoing
|
Performance measurements confirmed. Efficiency of the inquiry process. |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Priority #2 Results-Based Management Accountability Framework (RMAF) |
Ongoing |
The Tribunal has developed its RMAF and is monitoring Modern Comptrollership Practices. |
$25,000 |
$50,000 |
N/A |
|
Priority #3 Management Accountability Framework assessment. |
Ongoing |
Modern public service management that fully supports results for Canadians. |
$15,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Priority #4 Align Tribunal’s record management systems with government information management policy. |
Ongoing |
Implementation of the government standard Records, Documents and Information Managements System (RDIMS). |
$25,000 |
N/A |
$25,000 |
Tribunal Plans and Priorities
Planned activities |
Results and time lines |
Monitor the Tribunal’s case management initiative and, if appropriate, adjust measures. |
Measures confirmed or re-established, by March 2007, that appropriately assess the timeliness, effectiveness and efficiency of the inquiry process. |
The following three leading targets have been established by the Tribunal for ensuring the timely and effective delivery of the Tribunal’s inquiry process:
Statistics compiled for 2005 indicate that we continue to experience difficulty achieving these targets. This is largely due to three main factors: the unusually high number of inquiries currently before the Tribunal; a significant number of litigants appearing before the Tribunal without legal representation; and the introduction of case management during the pre-hearing stage of inquiries.
From 1996 to 2002, the average number of case files opened each year by the Tribunal, based on human rights complaints referred by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, was 44. In 2003 and 2004, the number of case files opened rose dramatically to 130 and 139, respectively. In 2005, that number decreased slightly to 99 and, based on advice from representatives of the Commission, is expected to decrease further toward traditional pre-2003 levels within the next few years. At time of publication, 129 case files remain active at the Tribunal.
The Tribunal’s new case management model was developed and implemented in early 2005. This process comprises a series of teleconferences with a Tribunal member who instructs the parties in meeting their pre-hearing obligations, such as disclosure, particulars of the complaint and the identification of witnesses and experts. The member’s intervention with the parties at this stage of the inquiry also helps to resolve preliminary issues that would otherwise need to be addressed at the time of the hearing of the complaint.
Anecdotal evidence to date suggests that hearings are now unfolding in a more efficient manner, unconstrained by the quagmire of issues and objections that, prior to the introduction of case management, often manifested in delays and additional expense at the time of hearing. Over the next year, the Tribunal will continue to monitor its case management initiative. Should it be revealed, as is suspected, that a preponderance of cases are, in fact, progressing more efficiently at hearing, the above targets will be adjusted to reflect the benefit of these results accordingly. Simply stated, a race to the hearing of a complaint may be of little value to the parties, if only to incur unnecessary and avoidable delays and expense at the hearing itself.
It has become evident as well that the expert intervention of a Tribunal member at the early stages of the inquiry greatly assists litigants who, without professional legal representation (apart from assistance that may be offered by the Commission), must grapple with the exigencies of a complex quasi-judicial process. And, despite the high number of case files currently before the Tribunal, we continue to anticipate that hearing time frames will be met by the Tribunal at the earliest convenience of the parties.
Planned activities |
Results and time lines |
Continue development of the Tribunal’s Results-based Management Accountability Framework (RMAF). |
Assessment and adjustment, by March 2007, of performance targets and practices for sound and modern management of resources and effective decision-making. |
In 2004–2005, the development of an RMAF was the only initiative outstanding from our Modern Comptrollership Action Plan (available at http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/about/download/Final%20Action%20Plan-e.htm). The RMAF was completed as planned in 2004–2005. In 2005–2006, the Tribunal developed the management practices, performance indicators and targets set out in the RMAF, then monitored their effectiveness and addressed any weaknesses.
In 2006–2007, a consultant will be hired to assist in further assessing the effectiveness of the Tribunal’s RMAF. Specifically, the consultant will help us determine whether the individual components of our RMAF - such as targets, indicators and risk management practices - are adequate and relevant in the circumstances of the Tribunal’s results objectives. This assessment will be a preamble to a program evaluation, which is being targeted for 2007–2008.
Planned activities |
Results and time lines |
Review management practices at the Tribunal for their adequacy in supporting the Tribunal’s mandate and integrate human resource planning into the Tribunal’s business plan framework. |
Tribunal’s management practices assign clear accountability, are managed with probity and reflect public service values, by March 2007. |
The Management Accountability Framework (MAF) was established by the Treasury Board Secretariat as a guideline and a set of standards for management expectations in the public service. In 2006-2007, the Tribunal will review its management practices and policies to ensure their soundness and relevance in supporting Modern Comptrollership, Human Resources Management Modernization, Service Improvement and Government-On-Line. The Tribunal will take steps to ensure its human resources plan reflects public service values and ethics and demonstrates clear linkages with the Tribunal’s business and strategic planning.
Further to the coming into force of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) in December 2005, the Tribunal will focus efforts on ensuring transparency and a better understanding of the new appointment process and the way that merit will be applied. Through information sharing and collaborative initiatives with other federal government departments and central agencies, we will ensure that the necessary guidance and tools are available to support the Tribunal’s managers in fulfilling their new modern management responsibilities.
The Tribunal will also review its information and decision-making practices to ensure access to and use of integrated information for corporate decision-making at all levels within the organization, including those taken at the senior management level. This will include an examination of the Tribunal’s full suite of policies with a view to assuring our success in supporting government’s horizontal initiatives, such as representativeness, building workforce capacity, linguistic rights, stewardship and accountability.
In 2006-2007, with guidance from central government agencies and through partnerships with other small agencies, the Tribunal will also begin development of a management framework for internal audit capacity and for ensuring a valid and secure business continuity platform.
These initiatives present daunting challenges for an organization the small size of the Tribunal. We are nevertheless confident that the collaboration, information sharing and partnerships that are becoming more readily available within the federal government sphere of departments and agencies, including the central agencies, will enable us to achieve these goals without unduly constraining the Tribunal’s most important preoccupation, the adjudication of human rights and employment equity complaints.
Planned activities |
Results and time lines |
Develop and implement in the Tribunal the government-wide Records, Documents and Information Management System. |
Tribunal’s platform of information classification and retrieval sustains business delivery improvement, legal and government policy compliance, citizen access and accountability, by March 2007. |
Managing information is a crucial element of all Government of Canada activities and an important part of the Tribunal’s responsibilities. The government’s Framework for the Management of Information (FMI) provides strategic direction and practical guidance. It describes why and how to integrate the management of information with a wide range of Government of Canada activities to improve business delivery, legal and policy compliance, citizen access and accountability.
In 2006-2007, the Tribunal will enhance its FMI compliance capability by implementing the government’s Records, Documents and Information Management System (RDIMS) for management of its corporate records. RDIMS also offers records imaging, optical character recognition, full-text indexing search and retrieval, workflow, an on-line document viewer and reporting capabilities. The implementation of RDIMS will create an opportunity as well for developing an interface in 2008-2009 with the Tribunal’s automated system for management of its operational case files, called the Tribunal Toolkit, which will enhance information retrieval efficiencies and strengthen the Tribunal’s strategy for assuring data source integrity and business continuity.
The Tribunal’s two program activities (described below), together with its management and corporate administration activities, achieve these strategic outcomes and results for Canadians as shown in the logic model (Figure 2.1 on page 11).
Program Activity: Public Hearings Under the Canadian Human Rights Act
Financial Resources (Millions of Dollars):
2006–2007 |
2007–2008 |
2008–2009 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.4 |
Human Resources (Full-Time Equivalents):
2006–2007 |
2007–2008 |
2008–2009 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
Description:
Inquire into complaints of discrimination to decide if particular practices have contravened the CHRA. |
Results:
Clear and fair interpretation of the CHRA, an adjudication process that is efficient, equitable and fair to all who appear before the Tribunal, and meaningful legal precedents for the use of employers, service providers and Canadians. |
This program activity will action all the priorities identified in Section 1.
Performance Indicators:
Client satisfaction Serving Canadians Number of cases commenced, pending, completed, withdrawn/discontinued, by time lines Number of cases heard/decided/settled Number of judicial reviews (overturned/upheld) |
Program Activity: Review Directions Given Under the Employment Equity Act
Financial Resources (Millions of Dollars):
2006–2007 |
2007–2008 |
2008–2009 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Human Resources (Full-Time Equivalents):
2006–2007 |
2007–2008 |
2008–2009 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Description:
Conduct hearings into requests from employers to review decisions issued to them by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) or into applications from the CHRC to confirm directions given to employers. |
Results:
Clear and fair interpretation of the EEA, an adjudication process that is efficient, equitable and fair to all who appear before the Tribunal, and meaningful legal precedents for the use of employers, service providers and Canadians. |
No activity is anticipated to occur during the planning period covered by this document.
Figure 2.1: Logic Model
Role of the Tribunal
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body created by Parliament to inquire into complaints of discrimination and to decide if particular practices have contravened the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Tribunal also decides cases brought under the Employment Equity Act (EEA) and, pursuant to section 11 of the CHRA, determines allegations of wage disparity between men and women doing work of equal value in the same establishment.
The Tribunal considers matters concerning employment or the provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodation. The CHRA makes it an offence for anyone to discriminate against any individual or group on 11 grounds:
The Tribunal’s jurisdiction covers matters that come within the legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada, including those concerning federal government departments and agencies, as well as banks, airlines and other federally regulated employers and providers of goods, services, facilities and accommodation. The Tribunal holds public hearings to inquire into complaints of discrimination. Based on evidence and the law (often conflicting and complex), it determines whether discrimination has occurred. If it has, the Tribunal determines the appropriate remedy to compensate the victim of the discriminatory practice and policy adjustments necessary to prevent future discrimination.
The majority of discriminatory acts that the Tribunal adjudicates are not malicious. Many conflicts arise from long-standing practices, legitimate concerns by employers, or conflicting interpretations of statutes and precedents. The role of the Tribunal is to discern the positions of the parties and establish fair and appropriate “rules” to resolve the dispute.
The Tribunal may only inquire into complaints referred to it by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, usually after a full investigation by the Commission. The Commission resolves most cases without the Tribunal’s intervention. Cases referred to the Tribunal generally involve complicated legal issues, new human rights issues, unexplored areas of discrimination or multi-faceted evidentiary complaints that must be heard under oath, especially in cases with conflicting evidence where issues of credibility are central.
The Tribunal is not an advocate for the CHRA; that is the role of the Commission. The Tribunal has a statutory mandate to apply the Act based solely on the evidence presented and on current case law. If there is no evidence to support the allegation, then the Tribunal must dismiss the complaint.
Members
The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is a small, permanent organization, comprising a full-time Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson and up to 13 full- or part-time members (see Figure 1). Under the statute, both the Chairperson and the Vice-Chairperson must have been members of the bar for more than ten years.
To be eligible for appointment by the Governor-in-Council (GIC), all members of the Tribunal are required to have expertise in, and sensitivity to, human rights issues. In addition, members attend regular meetings for training and briefing sessions on such topics as decision-writing techniques, evidence and procedure, and in-depth analysis of human rights issues. Throughout their three- or five-year terms, all Tribunal members are given opportunities for professional development.
Registry Operations
Administrative responsibility for the Tribunal rests with the Registry. It plans and arranges hearings, acts as liaison between the parties and Tribunal members, and provides administrative support. The Registry is also accountable for the operating resources allocated to the Tribunal by Parliament.
Corporate, Financial, Legal and Information Technology Services
Tribunal and Registry operations are supported by Corporate Services, Financial Services, Legal Services and Information Technology Services.
Corporate Services provides support to the Tribunal in facilities management, communications, material management, procurement of goods and services, information management, security, reception, and courier services. It also assists the Registrar’s Office in the development and implementation of government-wide initiatives, such as representativeness, building workforce capacity, linguistic rights, stewardship and accountability.
Financial Services provides the Tribunal with accounting services, financial information and advice.
Legal Services provides the Tribunal with legal information, advice and representation.
The main priority of Information Technology Services is to ensure that the Tribunal has the technology required to perform efficiently and effectively and that it is secure. The section advises Registry staff and members on the use of corporate systems and technology available internally and externally, and offers training. It provides procurement and support services for all computer hardware, software and information technology services. The section is also responsible for ensuring system compliance with government-wide technology policies and for ensuring system integrity and continuity.
Human resources services are contracted out to Public Works and Government Services Canada.
Figure 3.1 The Tribunal’s Organization Chart
Funding
The Tribunal is funded by annual appropriations from Parliament through a program expenditures vote for hearings and administrative operating expenditures. Main reference levels are not usually sufficient to cover costs for cases requiring inordinately long hearings, such as cases to determine allegations of wage disparity between men and women doing work of equal value in the same establishment (i.e., pay equity cases); Treasury Board submissions are prepared as required to obtain additional funding for these cases.
Workload
From 1996 to 2002, the average number of case files opened each year by the Tribunal, based on human rights complaint referrals from the Canadian Human Rights Commission, was 44. In 2003 and 2004, the number of case files opened rose dramatically to 130 and 139, respectively. In 2005, the number of case files opened at the Tribunal decreased slightly to 99. At time of publication, 129 case files remain active at the Tribunal.
Based on advice from representatives of the Commission, the volume of human rights complaints the Tribunal can anticipate receiving in 2006 will continue to decrease further toward reaching traditional pre-2003 levels within the next few years. In the meantime however, the Tribunal is continuing to manage its heaviest workload since its creation in 1998. This, in addition to the requirement for addressing and implementing several very important horizontal government initiatives, most notably the modernization of human resources management, the strengthening of accountability frameworks, the refinement of government information management, internal audit and business continuity reinforcement, will pose daunting challenges for the Tribunal’s limited resources in 2006-2007 and 2007-2008.
The Tribunal plans to meet these challenges through a combination of operational and corporate focused strategies. As noted above in Priorities 1 and 4, the Tribunal’s introduction in 2005 of a case management system for closely monitoring the pre-hearing phase of inquiries and the implementation of the Tribunal Toolkit, an automated case management system, will help the Tribunal realize new efficiencies. Anecdotal evidence to date has already lent credence to this expectation. Priorities 3 and 4 further underscore the Tribunal’s plans for collaborative arrangements, information sharing opportunities and partnerships with other government departments and agencies. This will assist the Tribunal as well in meeting the above-mentioned government initiatives at a much reduced cost than the Tribunal’s very limited resources would otherwise expect to achieve, at least not without severely impacting the Tribunal’s operational services.
In 2006-2007 and future years, the Tribunal will actively search out every possible opportunity for benefiting from both new technologies and inter-departmental and agency collaborations. In this way, we believe that the Tribunal will be well positioned to continue not only to meet its mandate for conducting inquiries, without undue delay to the parties, but also to fulfill its managerial responsibilities with due regard for modern management expectations for probity of resources and ensuring accountability.
Table 3.1: Tribunal Planned Spending and Full-Time Equivalents
|
Forecast Spending |
Planned Spending |
Planned Spending |
Planned Spending |
Public hearings under the CHRA |
4.7 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.4 |
Review directions given under the EEA |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Budgetary Main Estimates (gross) |
4.7 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Public hearings under the CHRA |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Review directions given under the EEA |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Non-Budgetary Main Estimates (gross) |
— |
— |
— |
— |
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Respendable revenue |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Total Main Estimates |
4.7 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.4 |
Adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
Supplementary Estimates: |
|
|
|
|
Funding for administration and coordination of pay equity cases before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Operating budget carry forward (horizontal item) |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Total Adjustments |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Total Planned Spending |
4.7 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Planned Spending |
4.7 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.4 |
Less: Non-Respendable revenue |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Plus: Cost of services received without charge |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
Total Departmental Spending |
5.9 |
5.5 |
5.6 |
5.6 |
Full-Time Equivalents |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
Note:The decrease in planned spending from 2005–2006 to 2006–2007 and beyond is attributable to the fact that planned spending has not yet been approved for pay equity cases.
The figures above for 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 include a frozen allotment in the amount of $10,000 each year for procurement savings as directed by Treasury Board Secretariat.
Table 3.2: Resources by Program by Activity
2006–2007 |
||||||||
Budgetary |
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Conduct hearings under the CHRA |
4.3 |
4.3 |
— |
4.3 |
4.3 |
— |
4.3 |
|
Review directions given under the EEA* |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
|
Total |
4.3 |
4.3 |
— |
4.3 |
4.3 |
— |
4.3 |
* No activity is anticipated under the program activity called Review directions given under the EEA;therefore, no funds have been allocated or approved.
Table 3.3: Voted and Statutory Items
Vote or Statutory Item |
|
|
|
15 |
Program expenditures |
3.9 |
4.3 |
(S) |
Contributions to employee benefit plans |
0.4 |
0.4 |
Total Tribunal |
4.3 |
4.7 |
Table 3.4: Services Received Without Charge
($ millions) |
Total |
|
|
Accommodation provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada |
1.0 |
Contributions covering employers' share of employees’ insurance premiums and expenditures paid by Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (excluding revolving funds) Employer’s contribution to employees’ insured benefits plans and expenditures paid by TBS |
.2 |
Worker’s Compensation coverage provided by Social Development Canada |
— |
Salary and associated expenditures of legal services provided by the Department of Justice Canada |
— |
|
|
|
|
Total 2006–2007 Services Received Without Charge |
1.2 |
Table 3.5: Internal Audits and Evaluations
Internal Audits or Evaluations |
A program evaluation is planned for fiscal year 2007-2008 |
Contacts for Further Information and Web Site
Registrar
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
160 Elgin Street
11th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 1J4
Tel: (613) 995-1707
Fax: (613) 995-3484
e-mail: registrar@chrt-tcdp.gc.ca
Web site: www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca
Legislation and Associated Regulations Administered
The Minister of Justice is responsible to Parliament for the Canadian Human Rights Act |
The Minister of Labour is responsible to Parliament for the Employment Equity Act |
Statutory Annual Reports and Other Tribunal Reports
The following documents can be found on the Tribunal’s Web site:
Action Plan for Modern Comptrollership – November 26, 2002 |
http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/about/download/Final%20Action%20Plan-e.htm |
Modern Comptrollership Capacity Assessment—Final Report June 2002 |
|
Performance Report |
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/dpr1/04-05/CHRT-TCDP/CHRT-TCDPd45-eng.asp |